[EM] It's just that IRV isn't a significant reform
chrisbenham at bigpond.com
Mon May 23 07:31:00 PDT 2005
You wrote (Sun.May22):
> Critics of IRV haven't said that IRV is evil. We've only said that IRV
> isn't a significant reform or a significant improvement over Plurality.
The part after "We've only said that.." logically implies that either:
(1) "IRV is evil" , or
(2) "Plurality isn't evil, or is only slightly evil".
Let's just say that I was paraphrasing the clearly implied message.
More information about the Election-Methods